We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."The most valuable feature is Special Monitoring."
"The users have the ability to rotate passwords on a daily basis with a Reconcile Account. Or, if they want to do one-time password checkouts, we can manage those, check in, check out. I like the flexibility of the changing of the password, specifically."
"We utilize PTA, and we are now integrating that into our risk management program so we can identify the uses of the vault which are outside of the norm, e.g., people accessing after hours. It has reduced the amount of time that we are looking through logs and audit logs."
"I love the ability to customize the passwords: the forbidden characters, the length of the password, the number of capital, lowercase, and special characters. You can customize the password so that it tailor fits, for example, mainframes that can't have more than eight characters. You can say, "I want a random password that doesn't have these special characters, but it is exactly eight characters," so that it doesn't throw errors."
"It provides an accountability to the individuals who are using it, knowing that it is audited and tracked."
"It takes people out of the machine work of ensuring credentials remain up-to-date, and handles connection brokering such that human usage and credential management remain independent."
"The technical support is good."
"All of the features of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager are valuable."
"The product is centralized and we can use it for security purposes."
"You can scale the solution up or down by department."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The solution offers excellent documentation that is easily available online."
"The solution is very good at securing files. For example, if I forward a secure document, it's blocked from others, as I can send it with restrictions in relation to who can open it."
"Integration between our departments has been the most valuable."
"A good feature that is present is MAM or Mobile Application Management. We can deploy this feature on the device, which is not managed by the organization. If I apply some security configuration on a personal device, the user would be really disappointed. What we do instead is that we give all access to the applications related to corporate and ask the users to use the application. We secure the application by putting the security features on the applications and not on the users' devices. This way, the users are happy, and we also meet our company's compliance standards. Then, everyone is happy."
"The solution is scalable."
"CyberArk has a lot on the privileged access side but they have to concentrate more on the application side as well."
"The scalability, sometimes, is lacking. It works really well for more static environments... But for an environment where you're constantly spinning up new infrastructure or new endpoints, sometimes it has a hard time keeping up."
"CyberArk Privileged Access Manager could improve the integration docking, it should have more layers. For example, integration with OpenShift."
"There is a bit of a learning curve, but it's a pretty complex solution."
"The greatest area of improvement is with the user interface of the Password Vault Web Access component."
"What could be improved in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the licensing model. It should be more flexible in terms of the users. Currently, it's based on the number of users, but many users only log in once in four months or once in five months. It would be great if the licensing model could be modified based on user needs. We even have users who have not logged in even once."
"Sometimes the infrastructure team is hesitant to provide more resources."
"We need a bit more education for our user community because they are not using it to its capabilities."
"We did the deployment with the help of Microsoft's consultants. But sometimes, we found it difficult to educate the application developers to integrate."
"Its performance needs enhancement."
"The licensing is quite expensive."
"Microsoft's feature management is based on licenses. Microsoft follows ethical licensing and hence do not restrict the use of it."
"Technical support could be improved. Sometimes they use a third party that's not so knowledgeable in the product and that can slow down things a bit."
"There are certain shortcomings in the licensing model of the product where improvements are required."
"The licensing can be messy at times."
"Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is expensive."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is ranked 10th in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 10 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security writes "Seamless integration and easy implementation ". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard, whereas Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Intune, ManageEngine Endpoint Central and Cisco Meraki Systems Manager (MDM+EMM).
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
